Ronald Riggs v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, 2014 HRTO 706

Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Between:

Ronald Riggs, Applicant

-and-

Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, Respondent

Interim Decision

Adjudicator: Brian Eyolfson Date: May 20, 2014 Citation: 2014 HRTO 706 Indexed as: Riggs v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Written Submissions

Ronald Riggs, Applicant Self-represented

Ontario Compensation Employees Union Local 1750, Affected party Cynthia Ireland, Representative

1The applicant filed this Application on September 9, 2013, under section 34 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the "Code"), alleging discrimination with respect to employment.

2In his Application, the applicant indicates that he is a member of a union. In his allegations, the applicant refers to both provisions of a collective agreement, and raises concerns regarding representation by his union.

3On October 30, 2013, the Ontario Compensation Employees Union Local 1750 (the "union") completed a Request to Intervene in this matter, indicating that it wishes to address its representation of the applicant. On November 22, 2013, the applicant filed submissions opposing the request to intervene, stating that the union never helped him. The respondent did not provide submissions in response to the union's request.

4This matter proceeded to mediation on March 27, 2014, but was not resolved. The Tribunal indicated in its Notice of Mediation that the union's Request to Intervene would be considered following mediation if no settlement was reached.

5As the Tribunal indicated in Boyce v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation, 2009 HRTO 131:

A union or association nearly always has an interest in a human rights application brought by an employee in a bargaining unit it represents when the application alleges discrimination in employment. Absent exceptional circumstances, the applicant's bargaining agent will be granted intervention status in Tribunal proceedings where it requests it.

6In the present case, the applicant's allegations involve provisions of a collective agreement between the respondent and the union. In the circumstances, I see no reason to depart from the Tribunal's usual approach. In accordance with the Tribunal's standard practice where an applicant is a member of a bargaining unit represented by a union or association, the union's request to intervene is granted.

7The scope of the union's participation in the proceedings will be determined by the adjudicator hearing this matter.

8I am not seized.